Many Protestants claim
that when Catholics address priests as "father," they are engaging
in an unbiblical practice that Jesus forbade: "Call no man your father
on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven" (Matt. 23:9).

How should Catholics
respond to such objections?

The Answer

To understand why the charge does not work, one must
first understand the use of the word "father" in reference to our
earthly fathers. No one would deny a little girl the opportunity to tell someone
that she loves her father. Common sense tells us that Jesus wasn't forbidding
this type of use of the word "father."

In fact, to forbid it would rob the address "Father"
of its meaning when applied to God, for there would no longer be any earthly
counterpart for the analogy of divine Fatherhood. The concept of God's role
as Father would be meaningless if we obliterated the concept of earthly fatherhood.

But in the Bible the concept of fatherhood is not
restricted to just our earthly fathers and God. It is used to refer to people
other than biological or legal fathers, and is used as a sign of respect to
those with whom we have a special relationship.

For example, Joseph tells his brothers
of a special fatherly relationship God had given him with the king of Egypt:
"So it was not you who sent me here, but God; and He has made me a father
to Pharaoh, and lord of all his house and ruler over all the land of Egypt"
(Gen. 45:8).

Job indicates he played a fatherly role
with the less fortunate: "I
was a father to the poor, and I searched out the cause of him whom I did not
know" (Job 29:16). And God himself declares that He will give a fatherly
role to Eliakim, the steward of the house of David: "In that day I will
call my servant Eliakim, the son of Hilkiah . . . and I will clothe him with
[a] robe, and will bind [a] girdle on him, and will commit . . . authority
to his hand; and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and
to the house of Judah" (Is. 22:20-21).

This type of fatherhood not only applies to those
who are wise counselors (like Joseph) or benefactors (like Job) or both (like
Eliakim), it also applies to those who have a fatherly spiritual relationship
with one.

For example, Elisha cries, "My
father, my father!" to Elijah as the latter is carried up to heaven in
a whirlwind (2 Kgs. 2:12). Later, Elisha himself is called a father by the
king of Israel (2 Kgs. 6:21).

A Change with the New Testament?

Some Fundamentalists argue that this usage changed
with the New Testament-that while it may have been permissible to call certain
men "father" in the Old Testament, since the time of Christ, it's
no longer allowed. This argument fails for several reasons.

First, as we've seen, the imperative "call
no man father" does not apply to one's biological father. It also
doesn't exclude calling one's ancestors "father," as is shown in
Acts 7:2, where Stephen refers to "our father Abraham," or in Romans
9:10, where Paul speaks of "our father Isaac."

Second, there are numerous examples in the
New Testament of the term "father" being used as a form of address
and reference, even for men who are not biologically related to the speaker.
There are, in fact, so many uses of "father" in the New Testament,
that the Fundamentalist interpretation of Matthew 23 (and the objection to
Catholics calling priests "father") must be wrong, as we shall see.

Third, a careful examination of the context of
Matthew 23 shows that Jesus didn't intend for his words here to be understood
literally. The whole passage reads, "But you are not to be called
'rabbi,' for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren. And call no man
your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be
called 'masters,' for you have one master, the Christ" (Matt. 23:8-10).

The first problem is that although Jesus seems to
prohibit the use of the term "teacher," in Matthew 28:19-20, Christ
himself appointed certain men to be teachers in his Church: "Go therefore
and make disciples of all nations . . . teaching them to observe all that I
have commanded you." Paul speaks of his commission as a teacher: "For
this I was appointed a preacher and apostle . . . a teacher of the Gentiles
in faith and truth" (1 Tim. 2:7); "For this gospel I was appointed
a preacher and apostle and teacher" (2 Tim. 1:11). He also reminds
us that the Church has an office of teacher: "God has appointed in the
church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers" (1 Cor. 12:28);
and "his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some
evangelists, some pastors and teachers" (Eph. 4:11). There is no doubt
that Paul was not violating Christ's teaching in Matthew 23 by referring so
often to others as "teachers."

Fundamentalists themselves slip up on this point
by calling all sorts of people "doctor," for example, medical doctors,
as well as professors and scientists who have Ph.D. degrees (i.e., doctorates).
What they fail to realize is that "doctor" is simply the Latin word
for "teacher." Even "Mister" and "Mistress" ("Mrs.")
are forms of the word "master," also mentioned by Jesus. So if his
words in Matthew 23 were meant to be taken literally, Fundamentalists would
be just as guilty for using the word "teacher" and "doctor"
and "mister" as Catholics for saying "father." But clearly,
that would be a misunderstanding of Christ's words.

So What Did Jesus Mean?

Jesus criticized Jewish leaders who love "the
place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues, and salutations
in the market places, and being called 'rabbi' by men" (Matt. 23:6-7).
His admonition here is a response to the Pharisees' proud hearts and their grasping
after marks of status and prestige.

He was using hyperbole (exaggeration to make a point)
to show the scribes and Pharisees how sinful and proud they were for not looking
humbly to God as the source of all authority and fatherhood and teaching, and
instead setting themselves up as the ultimate authorities, father figures, and
teachers.

Since Jesus is demonstrably using hyperbole when
He says not to call anyone our father-else we would not be able to refer to
our earthly fathers as such-we must read his words carefully and with sensitivity
to the presence of hyperbole if we wish to understand what He is saying.

Jesus is not forbidding us to call men "fathers"
who actually are such-either literally or spiritually. (See below on the
apostolic example of spiritual fatherhood.) To refer to such people as fathers
is only to acknowledge the truth, and Jesus is not against that. He is warning
people against inaccurately attributing fatherhood-or a particular kind or degree
of fatherhood-to those who do not have it.

As the apostolic example shows, some individuals
genuinely do have a spiritual fatherhood, meaning that they can be referred
to as spiritual fathers. What must not be done is to confuse their form of spiritual
paternity with that of God. Ultimately, God is our supreme protector, provider,
and instructor. Correspondingly, it is wrong to view any individual other than
God as having these roles.

Throughout the world, some people have been tempted
to look upon religious leaders who are mere mortals as if they were an individual's
supreme source of spiritual instruction, nourishment, and protection. The tendency
to turn mere men into "gurus" is worldwide.

This was also a temptation in the Jewish world of
Jesus' day, when famous rabbinical leaders, especially those who founded important
schools, such as Hillel and Shammai, were highly exalted by their disciples.
It is this elevation of an individual man-the formation of a "cult of personality"
around him-of which Jesus is speaking when He warns against attributing to someone
an undue role as master, father, or teacher.

He is not forbidding the perfunctory use of honorifics
nor forbidding us to recognize that the person does have a role as a spiritual
father and teacher. The example of his own apostles shows us that.

The Apostles Show the Way

The New Testament is filled with examples of and
references to spiritual father-son and father-child relationships. Many people
are not aware just how common these are, so it is worth quoting some of them
here.

Paul regularly referred to Timothy as
his child: "Therefore I sent to you Timothy, my beloved and faithful
child in the Lord, to remind you of my ways in Christ" (1 Cor. 4:17);
"To Timothy, my true child in the faith: grace, mercy, and peace from
God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord" (1 Tim. 1:2); "To Timothy,
my beloved child: Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus
our Lord" (2 Tim. 1:2).

He also referred to Timothy as his son:
"This charge I commit to you, Timothy, my son, in accordance with the
prophetic utterances which pointed to you, that inspired by them you may wage
the good warfare" (1 Tim 1:18); "You then, my son, be strong in
the grace that is in Christ Jesus" (2 Tim. 2:1); "But Timothy's
worth you know, how as a son with a father he has served with me in the gospel"
(Phil. 2:22).

Paul also referred to other of his converts
in this way: "To Titus,
my true child in a common faith: grace and peace from God the Father and Christ
Jesus our Savior" (Titus 1:4); "I appeal to you for my child, Onesimus,
whose father I have become in my imprisonment" (Philem. 10). None
of these men were Paul's literal, biological sons. Rather, Paul is emphasizing
his spiritual fatherhood with them.

Spiritual Fatherhood

Perhaps the most pointed New Testament reference
to the theology of the spiritual fatherhood of priests is Paul's statement,
"I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my
beloved children. For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not
have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel"
(1 Cor. 4:14-15).

Peter followed the same custom, referring to Mark
as his son: "She who is at Babylon, who is likewise chosen, sends you
greetings; and so does my son Mark" (1 Pet. 5:13). The apostles sometimes
referred to entire churches under their care as their children. Paul writes,
"Here for the third time I am ready to come to you. And I will not be
a burden, for I seek not what is yours but you; for children ought not to lay
up for their parents, but parents for their children" (2 Cor. 12:14);
and, "My little children, with whom I am again in travail until Christ
be formed in you!" (Gal. 4:19).

John said, "My little children, I am writing
this to you so that you may not sin; but if any one does sin, we have an advocate
with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous" (1 John 2:1); "No
greater joy can I have than this, to hear that my children follow the truth"
(3 John 4). In fact, John also addresses men in his congregations as "fathers"
(1 John 2:13-14).

By referring to these people as their spiritual sons
and spiritual children, Peter, Paul, and John imply their own roles as spiritual
fathers. Since the Bible frequently speaks of this spiritual fatherhood, we
Catholics acknowledge it and follow the custom of the apostles by calling priests
"father." Failure to acknowledge this is a failure to recognize and
honor a great gift God has bestowed on the Church: the spiritual fatherhood
of the priesthood.

Catholics know that as members of a parish, they
have been committed to a priest's spiritual care, thus they have great filial
affection for priests and call them "father." Priests, in turn, follow
the apostles' biblical example by referring to members of their flock as "my
son" or "my child" (cf. Gal. 4:19; 1 Tim. 1:18; 2 Tim. 2:1; Philem.
10; 1 Pet. 5:13; 1 John 2:1; 3 John 4).

All of these passages were written under the inspiration
of the Holy Spirit, and they express the infallibly recorded truth that Christ's
ministers do have a role as spiritual fathers. Jesus is not against acknowledging
that. It is He who gave these men their role as spiritual fathers, and it is
his Holy Spirit who recorded this role for us in the pages of Scripture. To
acknowledge spiritual fatherhood is to acknowledge the truth, and no amount
of anti-Catholic grumbling will change that fact.

The phrase Fathers of the Church is
a title of honor that refers to bishops and writers of the early Christian centuries.
Some of the Fathers of the Church had direct contact with the Twelve Apostles.
Others were sufficiently close to the apostles and their teachings that they
were able to express their doctrine clearly. These defenders of the faith are
also known as Apostolic Fathers.